Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Epic's Mark Rein Expounds On The Revolution

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the throwing-stones-from-high-places dept.

Games 115

nb caffeine writes "Epic's Mark Rein is shooting his mouth off again, this time bashing the Revolution controller and EA's management style. This seems to be a recurring theme with him." From the article: "I guarantee you there's going to be lots of people who say the whole reason for this game is this controller, we made the perfect game for the controller. And all it'll be is about the controller, and not necessarily a great game...I've heard EA and Activision make absolutely ridiculous statements about, 'Oh, it's going to take 30 million dollars to make a game and we need 300 people' - that's just a bunch of bullsh... They're just covering up for their own management and incompetence. Or mismanagement I should say."

cancel ×

115 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Troll (0, Troll)

cybereal (621599) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891747)

I'm glad the article has pictures, I've always wanted to know what a frightened troll looked like!

Re:Troll (1)

trickster721 (900632) | more than 8 years ago | (#13894600)

You've gotta feel a little bad for the guy. He's a growing fish in a shrinking puddle.

Single Console owners what a business is made on? (5, Insightful)

LoverOfJoy (820058) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891792)

That said, Rein continued, "Nintendo, you know, is going to make amazing games. I mean that's a given." Rein then conducted a quick audience survey to find out how many people present owned a GameCube - and found that rather a large number of hands were raised.

He then asked everyone who also owned a PS2 or Xbox to put their hands down - and concluded that under ten per cent of the audience were Cube owners only.

"Hard to make a business on less than 10 per cent," Rein said.

Why do you have to make your business be only about those who own ONLY your console? That's like asking PS2 owners how many of them don't also own a gaming pc and saying it's hard for Sony to make a business on that percentage.

Re:Single Console owners what a business is made o (1)

Rayonic (462789) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891846)

Why do you have to make your business be only about those who own ONLY your console?

That's what I thought too, but there is the issue of cross-platform games. Odds are that most of those won't properly utilize the Revolution controller. Soul Calibur 2 did great on the Gamecube, but the next big cross-platform game probably won't do so well on the Revolution.

Re:Single Console owners what a business is made o (3, Interesting)

Defiant00 (786745) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891942)

Of course, the next big cross-platform game could always be a FPS or some sort of RTS-type game that would work better with the Revolution controller than an analog stick setup.

For that matter, if more developers start making these types of games for next-gen consoles, it's possible that the Revolution version could be the version created first and then the PS3 and 360 versions are just ports with higher res textures/higher poly models. I'd imagine that'd make it a bit easier to go cross-platform instead of then having to try and downgrade the visuals for the Revolution (if it does turn out to be graphically inferior), then just change the controls for looking around/selecting units to work with an analog stick and you'd have a prettier but (most likely) more difficult to use version of the game.

This of course is just speculation, but at least for me I'd probably pick up a cross-platform FPS on the Revolution over the PS3 or 360 if the controller works as well as is being claimed.

Re:Single Console owners what a business is made o (1)

Minna Kirai (624281) | more than 8 years ago | (#13894313)

but the next big cross-platform game probably won't do so well on the Revolution.

Except that traditional Gamecube controllers can be plugged into the Revolution, so cross-platform games can run exactly as well as they ever did.

Re:Single Console owners what a business is made o (1)

revoemag (589206) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892009)

his poiunt is that if you have a GC and a Xbox then you are likely to games for the x-box, not the GC. Only 10% of the people in the room ONLY had a GC and thus would buy all games for the GC.

Re:Single Console owners what a business is made o (2, Insightful)

the_maddman (801403) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892237)

Of course with Nintendo, if you just buy the console and ignore all the games, they've already made a profit and can just laugh all the way to the bank.

I'm having so much fun with my DS I'm going to have to try out the Revolution. The Metroid demo is just amazing, it works so much better than I expected. I'm very curious to see if they can make that TV remote like controller work.

Re:Single Console owners what a business is made o (1)

patio11 (857072) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893666)

Multiple console ownership in an audience comprised of gaming geeks -- you don't say... What stunning revalation will he come up with next, only 10% of Harry Potters read only Potter, the rest read other fantasy as well, better watch out JK Rowling those billions aren't billions unless you can enjoy them alone?

This guy is an idiot (5, Insightful)

(A)*(B)!0_- (888552) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891808)

On the XBox 360 controller: "It works just fine for playing games, and it works fine for first-person shooter games"

That's just what I want to think when I am going to drop half a grand on a new video game console. Just fine is another way of saying, "nothing new." And that begs the question - why not just stick with the current XBox?

Another gem on the completely unscientific sampling method of who in attendance only owned Gamecubes: "Hard to make a business on less than 10 per cent,"

Nintendo is in the black. Sony and MS have not made money with the PS2 or the XBox. I would say that making a business doesn't have to be measured by market share - instead focusing on profitability. Nintendo profits. That's a good business.

Re:This guy is an idiot (4, Insightful)

Shadow Wrought (586631) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891910)

Indeed. I find it also pretty compelling that Nintendo has struck out on their own path while the Xbox and PS fanbois have a pissing contest about which one has better graphics. Nintendo is focusing on games, the other two are focusing on graphics. I'll likely own a Revolution before either of the others.

Re:This guy is an idiot (0, Flamebait)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892522)

Ding ding ding! There it is! The same post posted in every single discussion in the Games section and, invariably, moderated to +5 Insightful!

I love predictability.

Re:This guy is an idiot (1)

Shadow Wrought (586631) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892920)

Well I, for one, congratulate you one stealing one of my Insightfuls;-)

Re:This guy is an idiot (1)

Quattro Vezina (714892) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893322)

Maybe because it's a commonly held opinion?

I, for one, agree with the GP.

Re:This guy is an idiot (1)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 8 years ago | (#13896869)

That means it's not "insightful." There no "insight" if 1) a lot of people believe it and 2) it's been posted on Slashdot roughly 3,000 times before. Maybe we need a "predictable" mod or a "yawn" mod.

Re:This guy is an idiot (1)

MilenCent (219397) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893502)

Yeah, funny that.

In other news, the sky is blue. A RESULT OF THE COSMIC BLUE CONSPIRACY?!

Re:This guy is an idiot (1)

nb caffeine (448698) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892585)

I have an xbox, and like 40 games for it. I've spent more time playing my DS in the past month than gaming on the xbox. Nintendo is on the right track with the DS. Its different. There some seriously cool games coming out for it. I look forward to the revolution!

Re:This guy is an idiot (1)

DarkYoshi (895118) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893889)

Even more interesting is the connectivity between the two. In the current generation, all we saw was a GBA controlling the GameCube. That's just one extra screen. Now, we'll have three screens, one of them will be a touch screen, and one of them will have the normal Rev control. Now that's really innovative. (But how would one hold both a DS and a Controller?

Idea! An attachment simply connecting the Rev's controller to the bottom of a DS, giving you the pointing and touching! There are so many awesome ideas here...

Re:This guy is an idiot (0, Flamebait)

drsquare (530038) | more than 8 years ago | (#13894606)

Then why are all the best games not released on gamecube?

Re:This guy is an idiot (2, Funny)

Scherf (609224) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895347)

Then why are all the best games not released on gamecube?

Last time I checked there where a whole lot of very good games on the GameCube and actually the best game (Metroid Prime) was among them. You see what I did? I stated my opinion as a fact and thus won the argument! Hooray!

Why is it that naive, idealistic comments get modded up, but harsh realistic comments get modded down?

I guess it's because the stuff you think is harsh and realistic is actually just wrong, as my opinion just proved.

Re:This guy is an idiot (1)

drsquare (530038) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895821)

Then why, when any decent games are advertised, it says Xbox and PS2 at the bottom but never Gamecube?

Re:This guy is an idiot (2, Insightful)

PhoenixFlare (319467) | more than 8 years ago | (#13896070)

Then why, when any decent games are advertised, it says Xbox and PS2 at the bottom but never Gamecube?

So, what is your idea of a decent game, exactly? And why are you convinced that all other people share your views?

Your question should more accurately read "Then why, when any games I like are advertised, it says Xbox and PS2 at the bottom but never Gamecube?"

If nothing on Gamecube looks interesting to you, then so be it. Just don't assume that other people won't find something there to like.

You're an idiot (1)

Phil Wilkins (5921) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892849)

> Sony and MS have not made money with the PS2 or the XBox.

Wrong. MS have lost $4billion on XBox, but PS2 is Sony's biggest earner.

Re:You're an idiot (1)

DarkYoshi (895118) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893901)

MS lost four billion? Oh well, I guess they'll have to wait a few more years before aquiring all of western Europe.

Re:You're an idiot (1)

(A)*(B)!0_- (888552) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895761)

I apologize for making that error. Although, my main point was that Nintendo is making a nice business as evidenced by their profit.

Do you disagree with that?

If you do decide to reply, please save the insults. I made an error. It happens.

Re:This guy is an idiot (1)

Breakfast Pants (323698) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893397)

"I would say that making a business doesn't have to be measured by market share - instead focusing on profitability. Nintendo profits. That's a good business."
 
That is very true. Unfortunately Nintendo's profits don't mean shit to a 3rd party. 3rd party developers for both PS2 and XBox make fine profits--perhaps at Sony and Microsoft's expense. As long as there are giant companies that do so much more than games willing to take a loss on games for some long term goal you can't blame third parties for prefering them over Nintendo. It sucks for Nintendo, but it's the way it is.

Re:This guy is an idiot (1)

DarkYoshi (895118) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893917)

I'd rather have Nintendo be the only developer for the Rev than have EA, Epic, or any other company make all their best games for the Revolution. In fact, I wouldn't mind if Ninty and Namco were the only developers for the Revolution. Gotta have Namco.

Re:This guy is an idiot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13896048)

Sony in fact makes most of its money as a corporation from the PlayStation brand. All of their other divisions have been tanking, the PS2 has been keeping Sony afloat. Analysts are saying that if the PS3 doesn't hit - and big - Sony as a whole is in a lot of trouble.

That said, this guy is an idiot. He says the current controller is "just fine"...but to people playing the games right now. Hey Mark, guess what? There are a LOT more people who don't play games right now then there are people who do. So, if you change your attitude to maybe try to lure in skeptics and critics to the wonderful world of gaming...

Hard to make a business on 10 percent? (3, Insightful)

-kertrats- (718219) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891817)

He says it's hard to make a business on 10 percent of people owning your console exclusively. Why? If all the people from the first call paid Nintendo their money for the Gamecube, what does Nintendo care if they own other consoles? To claim you need to be the exclusive console to be successful is asinine.

Re:Hard to make a business on 10 percent? (3, Interesting)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891871)

Exactly, infact as this was a gamer expo, you'd be hard pressed to find much more than 15% of people exclusivly having a PS2 or Xbox.

Re:Hard to make a business on 10 percent? (1)

losman (840619) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892065)

Apple's doing it, in fact they are doing quite well. This guy is just another "Pay attention to me... I'm important..." monkey-boy!

Re:Hard to make a business on 10 percent? (4, Insightful)

mconeone (765767) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892188)

It's pretty simple actually. If Epic makes a game only for the PS/XBox, they are only cutting themselves out of 10% of the market. The idea here is that while a number of people own a Gamecube, they can still buy the Epic non-Gamecube game for a system they own. Also, people are more likely to buy a game on the most powerful platform they own (GC would get overlooked for the XBox.)

Don't get me wrong though, that 10% number is complete BS.

For the next generation, what this really comes down to is whether the Revolution controller is better for FPSes than the XBox/PS one. If it isn't, then his thinking is on track, as most gamers would buy the game for their other system, instead of the Revolution. If it is, then his reasoning is bogus and the game would be profitable on the Revolution (assuming that the Revolution sells well).

Um, yeah, Mark... (5, Insightful)

sc0ttyb (833038) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891853)

So, the company that basically MADE the controller what it is today is getting flak about its new controller? Don't you think you should give Nintendo just a LITTLE credit?

You know that D-pad on the 360 controller you're holding? Nintendo did that. Vibration? Nintendo. Shouder buttons? Nintendo.

Just a thought.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (2, Interesting)

mconeone (765767) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892257)

To be the devil's advocate, Nintendo also came up with things like Robby the Robot, Virtual Boy, and the Power Glove. I just mean that even though Nintendo is the biggest innovator, it does not automatically translate to each of their innovations being successful and industry-transforming. While I am very interested in the Revolution controller, I can see it being an utter failure at the same time. Only time will tell.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (2, Interesting)

sc0ttyb (833038) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892327)

"To be the devil's advocate, Nintendo also came up with things like Robby the Robot, Virtual Boy, and the Power Glove. I just mean that even though Nintendo is the biggest innovator, it does not automatically translate to each of their innovations being successful and industry-transforming."

I will give you that. My eyes STILL hurt from the Virtual Boy.

However, this is a complete reinvention of the way human beings interact with a gaming console. For Nintendo to fuck this up would be DEVASTATING. From the reports of use of the controller, it would seem that Nintendo has learned from the Power Glove's mistakes (and let's be honest, here: the Power Gloves was WAY ahead of its time, and the tech just wasn't quite there yet -- but at least they tried something different). The only way to know for sure is to get the controller in my hands and start playing games with it.

I personally find the prospect of FPS with this controller rather exciting.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (1)

mconeone (765767) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892391)

I personally find the prospect of FPS with this controller rather exciting.

I agree, the only thing bothering me is the strain of holding my arm out for an extended period of time. I can't say for sure until I try an FPS with it.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (1)

theclam159 (833616) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892427)

The reports that I've heard say that the best way to hold it is like a TV remote. You just rest it in your lap. You don't need to make huge motions for it to work.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (1)

vitaflo (20507) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892556)

You don't need to hold your arm out. Everyone that's tried it has said you can put your hand in your lap or on the arm of your sofa and just move your wrist around to do what you need. Similar to how much you move your mouse on your computer to move the cursor on screen. Shouldn't be tiring at all.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (1)

mconeone (765767) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892625)

Ah, for some reason I was thinking in terms of a gun-shooter (House of the Dead, Duck Hunt) which you have to aim at where you want to shoot on the screen as opposed to a FPS, where aiming is relative to where the controller is.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13896261)

nintendo didn't make the power glove, mattel did

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (5, Informative)

Admiral Ackbar 8 (848624) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892432)

Nintendo also came up with things like Robby the Robot, Virtual Boy, and the Power Glove.

For the love of everything good, Mattel made the friggin Power Glove. Not Nintendo.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (1)

mconeone (765767) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892570)

Ok, my bad. I was 10 or 11 when I got that thing.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13892838)

Also, Robby the Robot was just a marketing ploy to get stores to carry the NES since it was an "electronic toy", not a "video game". Atari singlehandedly created and destroyed the market for home video games. From a financial and marketing standpoint, Nintendo had to start from scratch. Thus, it was sold as a toy. Thus, the Light Gun and Robby. Robby was never sold as an external peripheral, IIRC.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (1)

sloose (864787) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893864)

Apparently Mattel also made the NES. There's a big honking Mattel logo right on the original box my NES came in (circa 1989).

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (5, Informative)

scot4875 (542869) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892604)

The point of Rob was *not* as an alternate input device. The point was to make the NES seem unlike any of the previous video game consoles. They added him, even though they *knew* it was crap, to distinguish themselves from the 'competition,' which at that point was mainly customers' distaste for video game consoles. Read Game Over or (IIRC) High Score. They both talk about this.

Rob was an investment. He was smoke and mirrors. You'll notice that they didn't sell it in anything but the first NES packages.

And, as someone else already pointed out, Mattel made the power glove, not Nintendo. The only alternate input devices that Nintendo provided for the NES were the Advantage and the NES Max, which were both good controllers.

--Jeremy

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (1)

matlokheed (602233) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895843)

Actually, I believe the reason R.O.B. was created was because after the Atari disaster caused by E.T., the videogame market entirely crashed. North American chain stores had no interest in carrying a videogame system. Nintendo created ROB (which is actually a bizarre piece of technology revolving around flashes of light generated by the game screen) to say "No, you've got it all wrong. This isn't a video game console. This is robots and etc, etc."

ROB was smoke and mirrors, but did his job well enough to get Nintendo through the front doors of the local Toys R Us, which is all he was ever meant to do. That they actually sold some copies of Gyromite is just icing.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13896944)

Both of these +5 responses were initially posted by Anonymous Cowards. Just sayin.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (1)

Ghost_MH (677894) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892933)

The Virtual Boy was a goof up on Nintendo's part because, as it seemed, they thought Yokoi was invincible...I'll give you that one, but R.O.B. was never meant to sell well. Nintendo made two whole games for the thing...It was nothing more than an excuse for Nintendo to get its console in electronic stores.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (1)

Chemical (49694) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892957)

It's not "Robby the Robot", it's R.O.B. (Robotic Operating Buddy). This is Robby the Robot [wikipedia.org] But yeah, your point stands. R.O.B. was a dumb idea. Then again, if Nintendo had supported it a little more, who knows what kind of interesting games might have been developed for it. AFAIK only two games were ever made that supported the device.

Re:Um, yeah, Mark... (1)

prockcore (543967) | more than 8 years ago | (#13894829)

Nintendo also came up with things like Robby the Robot, Virtual Boy, and the Power Glove.

I'll give you ROB and the Virtual Boy, but the Power Glove was 3rd party. Nintendo had nothing to do with it.

The Virtual Boy would have done better but for 2 things:
A. They called it Virtual Boy, so people thought it was portable... it wasn't.
B. Red on Black makes my eyes bleed. But doing the same thing with a pair of LCDs would've been awesome! Too bad the technology wasn't there.

hmm.. (4, Interesting)

Darune (716587) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891854)

Well he's probably right about a lot of games being made for the Revolution just for the controller. Some will definitely suck, but I think(hope) that overall they should be good games, and as he said, Nintendo will provide some A+ titles.

His comment on the FPS's I'm not so sure about. All the consoles currently handle FPS's relatively the same, the XBox trigger buttons may give it a slight advantage. As for the Revolution though, companies could make their own attachments for FPS's. The shotgun mockup from IGN is an example of something companies could (in theory) do. Hopefully game companies will take advantage of controller add-ons, but somehow I doubt it will be as magical and widespread as I hope. I'm worried that without the right addon for the controller the user will get a "magic wand" feeling with Revolution FPS's.

In the end I will side with the majority of the comments, and agree that he is just trolling anyways.

Bizarre Definition of Failure (5, Insightful)

skryche (26871) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891931)

This proof of Nintendo's failure seems about as suitable:

Rein then conducted a quick audience survey to find out how many people present owned a GameCube - and found that rather a large number of hands were raised.

He then asked everyone who also ate at McDonald's in the past week to put their hands down - and concluded that under ten per cent of the audience were Cube owners who hadn't eaten at McDonald's recently.

"Hard to make a business on less than 10 per cent," Rein said.

Re:Bizarre Definition of Failure (1)

mconeone (765767) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892424)

Can someone share with me how this is insightful? The only thing I see wrong with Rein's original assumption is that GC/PS2 owners would buy a cross-platform game for PS2 instead of the GC. Maybe the games he's talking about have online play, I don't know. But it is a valid insight to say that XBox/GC owners would probably buy a cross-platform game for the XBox over the GC.

Re:Bizarre Definition of Failure (1)

skryche (26871) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893148)

I'm saying he's comparing apples and oranges, in that just because somebody owns a Gamecube and an Xbox doesn't mean that owning a Gamecube should be discounted... but you make an excellent point. I wasn't thinking in terms of cross-platform games, which is, no doubt, what he is thinking of.

Okay, so I'm not so insightful.

Re:Bizarre Definition of Failure (1)

prockcore (543967) | more than 8 years ago | (#13894983)

The only thing I see wrong with Rein's original assumption is that GC/PS2 owners would buy a cross-platform game for PS2 instead of the GC.

Which is strange. I own all 3 consoles. If I want online play, I'll get the game for the xbox. If I don't care about online play, I'll get the GC version, because the graphics are indistinguisable from the xbox version and I love my wavebirds.

I don't own *any* crossplatform games for the PS2, or at least they weren't crossplatform when I bought them. They look like crap and the controller is awful. 4 shoulderbuttons make me constantly hit the wrong one, and I prefer triggers anyway.

In fact, I just picked up American Wasteland for the GC.

Duck Hunt Revolution (1, Interesting)

ABCC (861543) | more than 8 years ago | (#13891996)

Does anybody else think that all the hype about the new controller is reminiscent of y2k vapourware? 2-Handed D-Pads are a tried and proven concept, whereas pointing an IR light at a TV screen seems to be a very difficult method of controlling anything other than an options screen. Nintendo's optical Duck Hunt gun looks far more accurate than the Revolution controller. Judging by the way most people rest the TV remote on their beergut, I don't see this vapourware as something that's going to bridge the gap between console salesmen and the non-gaming public. In fact, the Revolution controller looks like something that's going to be damned uncomfortable to hold in ones' hands for games that rely on the normal D-Pad configuration, vastly increasing the incendence of 'Nintendo Thumb' syndrome (a.k.a. carpal tunnel)... your thoughts?

Re:Duck Hunt Revolution (1)

jorenko (238937) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892029)

Quoth Wikipedia, "Vaporware (also spelled vapourware) is software or hardware which is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge, either with or without a protracted development cycle."

I think you might want to rethink your choice of words.

And no, I don't think it's going to be uncomforable to use. It might be a little awkward having my arm extended for long periods of time at first, but I imagine I'll get used to it pretty quickly.

You Know Nothing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13892210)

"IR light"?? You're the perfect example of the dumbasses who rant about the controller and assume things without factual knowledge. Yeah everyone keeps comparing the device to a remote control, but it's NOT A REMOTE CONTROL. It doesn't use IR LIGHT to point. It has full 360 angle tracking. Read up on the specs. Then come back and delete your post.

Re:Duck Hunt Revolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13892325)

I think you're yet another intenet weenie who can't be bothered to actually TRY the new controller before bitching about how bad it's going to suck.

Re:Duck Hunt Revolution (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13892615)

Notwithstanding the rude comments by the other ACs, my thoughts are that you should do a little research into the subject. First of all, the Revolution controller isn't an IR pointer. The comparisons to TV remote controls are based on shape, not technology. Nintendo hasn't said a whole lot about how the thing works, but they have revealed that there will be two small devices beside the TV. These presumably let the system know where the TV is relative to the controller(s), which suggests some form of motion detection is going on. Anyone in the know, please offer corrections.

You should also look into how the Zapper (the "Duck Hunt gun") worked. "Accurate" isn't how I'd describe it. When the trigger was pulled, the screen went black, then flashed a white rectangle around each target sprite, one frame at a time. The Zapper detected a sudden drop then spike in light intensity, which, combined with timing, indicated a hit. Modern light guns make use of the scan line, instead. The entire screen is brightened (to make sure every phosphor is lit), and the system times how long it takes for the electron beam to hit the phosphor the gun is aimed at. Obviously, this method only works with CRT televisions. The less accurate Zapper method will work with any display. I'm hopeful that the Revolution will do away with both the CRT requirement and the annoying flashing. (Note: Most of what I know about light guns I learned from Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] , so corrections are welcome.)

Also, and I admit I'm nitpicking, to the best of my knowledge there has never been a two-handed D-pad. The D-pad isn't the entire controller, or the sticks, or whatever you were trying to refer to, but the cross-shaped multi-directional switch. I'm afraid I can't think of a better description than that other than "d-pad," so I apologize if that sounds wordy.

Re:Duck Hunt Revolution (1)

Ghost_MH (677894) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893026)

From what little we've been told about how the game pad works, there is a Gyration-made gyroscope in the game pad that can detect basic movement as well as angle, rotation, and yaw. The sensors, as far as I know, are, as you said, meant to keep track of the game pad's movement in 3D space. Theoretically, the Revolution should be able to tell how high or low you are holding the game pad in relation to the television screen. On that note, Nintendo says they've tested the game pad on a wide variety of televisions, front and rear projection, LCD, CRT, and Plasma up to 100" in size and they say the controller has worked flawlessly across the board. Why they bothered to test the game pad on different types of televisions is beyond me. That leads me to believe that the game pad does, indeed, have a sort of light gun built in to help with accuracy when the game pad is pointed directly at the screen. However, we do know from those that have actually used the Revolution that the game pad does not need to be pointed at the screen for the Revolution to be able to pick up your movements. Needless to say, it sounds like an odd setup Nintendo has come up with. I'd be fascinated to hear all about its technical aspects once Nintendo actually lets the public know what's going on internally.

Re:Duck Hunt Revolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13893212)

Hmm. The controller does have a little window on the end that could house an optical sensor of some kind, but I'm at a loss for what it could be used for if it works on LCD, CRT, and plasma displays, rear or front projection, up to 100 inches. The only thing all of those have in common is visible light, right? What are the chances that it can actually recognize what it sees on the screen? Pretty low, I'd wager. It could be some groundbreaking feature they've yet to reveal, or it could be a simple thing like a laser pointer to give you immediate feedback on your aim or an IR transmitter to turn the thing on or control your TV.

Actually, now that I think of it, there is going to be a DVD player add-on. Perhaps disabling the fancy electronics in the controller in DVD playing mode and just using an IR signal to communicate with the Revolution will save battery power.

As for movement, I've been wondering if the controller doesn't have two transmitters in it, front and back, that the Revolution uses in conjunction with the TV sensors to triangulate/trilaterate the controller's position and orientation, but I don't know the math well enough to know if that's plausible. Presumably, roll could be measured by the same sort of device they used in Warioware Twisted.

this opinion brought to you by... (5, Interesting)

dr.fishopolis (604072) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892026)

Reading the article, I got the distinct impression that he was schilling for Microsoft... Bashing PS3, revolution, gamecube, and calling the xbox 360 controller all but perfect. Kneepads like that don't come cheap, so you do a search for "Epic Microsoft partnerships" and you get this... http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/ut2004/news_6120 091.html [gamespot.com]

Epic Games today announced that its Unreal Engine 3 technology will be used in games from Microsoft's internal development team, Microsoft Game Studios ... While no specific titles were mentioned, Epic confirmed that the technology will be used for "the next-generation Xbox platform." ... "We are hugely excited that Microsoft Game Studios have selected Unreal Engine 3 for its next generation Xbox platform games," said Epic Games president Mark Rein.

Re:this opinion brought to you by... (1)

RzUpAnmsCwrds (262647) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892954)

I very much doubt that he is shilling for Microsoft. Remember that Unreal Engine is a major part of the PS3 dev system - Epic has a lot to gain if the PS3 does well.

For example:

In what must come as a relief to developers, Epic Games' Tim Sweeney was on hand to vouch for the PS3, saying it was "easy to program for" and that Epic had received its first PS3 hardware two months ago.

Re:this opinion brought to you by... (1)

xtieburn (906792) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895433)

If I did a search for anything id come up with... what I searched for. Saying thats evidence of some underhanded MS deal is ridiculous.

I put in 'Unreal 3' and 'PS3' SHOCK! Sony have licensed it as well! Its clearly a conspiracy against Nintendo...

If people actually read this article without seeing red everytime the guy says anything against anything youll find its blunt but probably for the most part true.

He slags of the prototype PS3 controller, why not when it was posted here there was a load of people saying the same things (and some amusing refrences to Batman and ziplines.)

He slags off the fact that the Nintendo controller will become a gimmick. This isnt too large a leap of faith either, youd have to be a fool to not have any fears that Nintendo's efforts are going to fall flat and like he says there almost certainly will be gimmick driven games with no substance. (Whether they will outnumber decent games remains to be seen hes just picked a side is all.)

His comments on Nintendo's market share were the only real problem with the whole article and even they arnt entirely off target. Ive seen a lot of people say if you asked who exclusively had a PS2 or X-Box it would be a similar percentage. Even if that was true it doesnt change the fact that 10% exclusivity is a difficult percentage to work with. Sony and MS have the money and backing to work with the fact there are 2 other powerful rivals vying for control. Does Nintendo? Especially as they are taking a risk with their new controller? As a criticism of the company (Which I honestly dont think it was.) it falls flat. As a point about how difficult the market has become with the current competition its spot on.

Oh and he also says that the PS3 and X-Box360 are fine consoles that wont dissapoint and that Nintendo will undoubtedly produce some fantastic games. Im certainly not seeing any problem with that.

(He probably would have said the revolution was a fine console as well but as he correctly points out they havent released the specs.)

Gimick!?! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13892068)

QUOTE
Rein then conducted a quick audience survey to find out how many people present owned a GameCube - and found that rather a large number of hands were raised.

He then asked everyone who also owned a PS2 or Xbox to put their hands down - and concluded that under ten per cent of the audience were Cube owners only.

"Hard to make a business on less than 10 per cent," Rein said. /QUOTE

Who would listen to someone who has such poor logic skills? If he were to switch the systems around would he be saying "Hard to make a business on less than 15 per cent" (in reference to the PS2 or XBox) because that is the reality; if you throw in a gaming PC I bet the number would be under 10% for any system you choose. [And don't say that the PS2 has sold uber-billions of units more than the XBox or Gamecube, If you look at the number of PS2s that have had a new game (rented or purchased) played on them in the past 12 months it would likely only be 1.5-2 times as many as there are Gamecubes/XBoxes. This is because a lot of PS2s were sold as cheap DVD players, are only used by pirates, or have died from the famous disc-read error]

Any developer who is worth listening to should be supporting Nintendo (at least in spirit); at one point in time every new game style was just a gimick.

Grand Theft Auto was just a gimick ...
The Sims were just a gimick ...
Tomb Raider was just a gimick ...
Mario 64 was just a gimick ...
Starfox was just a gimick ...
Wolfenstein 3D was just a gimick ...
Super Mario Bros. was just a gimick ...
Donkey Kong was just a gimick ...
Pong was just a gimick ...

It is through time and refinement that a gimicky game becomes a whole new genre all to itself

Re:Gimick!?! (1)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892232)

Tomb Raider was just a gimick ...

Hate to break it to you... but Tomb Raider still is just a gimick, the style of gameplay was done before, its just the boobies and the marketing that made it a sucess.

Re:Gimick!?! (1)

DarkYoshi (895118) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893948)

Hate to break it to you... but Tomb Raider still is just a gimick, the style of gameplay was done before, its just the boobies and the marketing that made it a sucess.

Hate to break it to you... but Tomb Raider still is just a gimick, the style of gameplay was done before, its just the marketing of the boobies that made it a sucess.

Re:Gimick!?! (1)

Minna Kirai (624281) | more than 8 years ago | (#13894325)

the style of gameplay was done before

Go on, name an earlier title with the style of Tomb Raider.

Re:Gimick!?! (1)

buffer-overflowed (588867) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895328)

Prince of Persia, duh. Do I win?

Re:Gimick!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13897071)

Don't forget Fade to Black and Out of this World.

Re:Gimick!?! (1)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892443)

I'm reminded of a quote that according to a quick Google search is from Carl Sagan:

But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.

Until I've actually gotten a chance to try the Revolution controller, I'm not willing to say it's going to work as a controller. Likewise, I'm not willing to say it isn't going to work. I'm definitely interested in trying it out, but until we see the console and the games, it's way too early to call it as good or not.

Which doesn't mean that Mark Rein wasn't being a clown in the article, but it does mean it's too early to say one way or the other. Only time will tell.

Re:Gimick!?! (1)

hambonewilkins (739531) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892673)

"Until I've actually gotten a chance to try the Revolution controller, I'm not willing to say it's going to work as a controller."

I've used it. Or, one like it. It controls my TV.

kidding!

That stat means nothing (1)

dividedsky319 (907852) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892092)

I'm sure if you took a poll of the audience, a similar percentage (if not less) would exclusively own either a PS2 or an Xbox as well... nowadays, hardcore gamers will have more than one system. The fact that 10% of the audience own ONLY a Gamecube means nothing. The fact that the majority of them DO own a Gamecube DOES mean something. Sounds to me like this guy just has a grudge against Nintendo. (and/or, is an Xbox fanboy... scary when the developers themselves become fanboys)

Childish (1)

Datamonstar (845886) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892199)

This reminds me of my old Everquest days where your guild was looked down upon because you used too many people to take down a MOB. Why is it that the more games come to be for "adults" the developers act more like children?

I'm in no way a fan of EA, but but if they want to use 300 people to make a game that only requres 25, then let them do it. EA is one of the few companies who CAN do something of this magnitude.

It's going to be interesting to see what happens when the slew of revolution games come out with the controller as a feature. Some will fail, and others will succeed. BUT it's those small (realistically) few that succeed that make the other failures worth their while. The most horribly crappy game ever made can still lend some insight as to how a game can and perhaps should be made.

So what we're seeing here is a remarkable time in console gaming. We should thank Nintendo for the new controller. we've got some incredibly horrible and crappy games to look forward to now!! But along with them will be some real hits that just may change the face of gaming for the better. In my eyes the risk is all worth it.

Or.. we could just keep on playing FPS games with game pads, mice, and keyboards... /yawn

Here he goes again.... (1)

GameNutz (556033) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892683)

"I guarantee you there's going to be lots of people who say the whole reason for this game is this controller, we made the perfect game for the controller. And all it'll be is about the controller, and not necessarily a great game."

Really Mark? That never happens in the world of game technology, eh? People using technology for technology's sake, and still build a crap game. How many of the games that utilize your company's Unreal technology are clunkers? See: Unreal Technology. [unrealtechnology.com] There are some great games in there (mostly the UT games) but some REAL CRAP as well.

Perhaps he should do his engine licensing the same way he segmented the GC playing audience: full UT Engine price for a game on a single platform, half price for 2 platforms, a third for 3 platforms, etc. Seeing as how most developers target 4 platfroms, let's see how well you do with 25% of the market :)

Troll? I don't think so. More like businessman (2, Interesting)

hambonewilkins (739531) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892754)

Before I get bashed as a Nintendo-hater or Xbox-lover, or whatever, let me say I have no dog in this fight. I don't plan on buying any of the systems and don't really care about the upcoming battle.

But I think he's right, that in the beginning the controller will simply be a gimmick, much like Sony's Eye-Toy. Yes, it's fun and yes they are fun diversions, but these aren't "great games." They are party gimicks.

That's not to say the controller won't eventually be used well, just that launch titles will likely be gimicky.

Second of all, his comment about the 10% of Game Cube owners seems to be missed by everybody here. He has a valid point - if you own a Game Cube and a PS2 and an Xbox, yes you certainly have given Nintendo money, but you haven't increased their market share at all since you have negated that by buying their competing product as well. Since only 10% of the audience had ONLY a Game Cube, he's inferring that Game Cube has about a 10% marketshare. As a shorthand, it works. The same would be true if he did the poll for Xbox and found that only 10% of the audience owned ONLY an Xbox. These are competing products. They compete in the same market. If you own only a PS2 you are helping to boost Sony's marketshare. However, if you own all three, you aren't.

Also, I personally have no qualms with the existing Xbox controller (or GameCube controller) when I've used them, but if his comments about FPS sales are false, then feel free to disprove them. He said: "It [Xbox controller] works just fine for playing games, and it works fine for first-person shooter games, as evidenced by the fact that they sold more first-person shooters on consoles than anybody's ever sold on PCs." Show how this is wrong if you believe it is false. Obviously people don't much mind playing Halo on the Xbox or they wouldn't be buying it.

In the end, his comments aren't really controversial and the only "troll" as I see it is the OP he said he was "shooting his mouth off." He's a company exec. They prognosticate all the time. They compete with other firms. He may have better insight into the industry than any of us.

Re:Troll? I don't think so. More like businessman (1)

dr.fishopolis (604072) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892931)

if his comments about FPS sales are false, then feel free to disprove them. He said: "It [Xbox controller] works just fine for playing games, and it works fine for first-person shooter games, as evidenced by the fact that they sold more first-person shooters on consoles than anybody's ever sold on PCs." Show how this is wrong if you believe it is false.

It is not a matter of true/false, it is a matter of logical fallacy - it's a call for stagnation based on an appeal to popularity: The number of people using a thing has no direct relation to the quality of that thing, while he's using the number of users as proof of this quality, and a reason to stagnate in development.

If you're still confused, let's state it this way:

"ashlee simpson is a great singer, as evidenced by the fact that 10 billion people bought her new album, and therefore pop music has no need for singers who can hit a note."
or
"AAC sounds better than FLAC,as evidenced by the sales figures of IPODs, and therefore we don't need to improve digital audio quality"
or
"The earth in 1300 was flat, as evidenced by the beliefs of the masses... so we don't need new thoughts about that" Thing X was the most popular kind of thing ever, therefore it's good enough and no improvements are welcome. In fact, my last post was the best ever, as evidenced by the page hits on slashdot. I'm not sure why I'm even continuing to post here...

Re:Troll? I don't think so. More like businessman (1)

hambonewilkins (739531) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892981)

Oh, I don't disagree at all, but I think the point is that the Xbox controller is at least suitable for FPS' and that if the, say, PS2 controller were more suitable, FPS' would have done way better on PS2, considering it is a far better selling console.

I don't disagree that the Revolution controller could be better or that (in this VP's opinion) it could be worse. And perhaps he is saying there's no reason to improve the controller (that's not the way I read it). However, the way the article is written, with the selective quoting, he could just be saying the Revolution controller won't be good for FPS' (his opinion) and that the Xbox controller has been good because people are playing many FPS' on the Xbox, indicating at least satisfaction with the input method."

But you are right, sales alone do not indicate quality. But, again, if the PS2 or GameCube controller were better for FPS', you'd think they'd sell more FPS games, right?

Re:Troll? I don't think so. More like businessman (1)

GameNutz (556033) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893607)

Oh, I don't disagree at all, but I think the point is that the Xbox controller is at least suitable for FPS' and that if the, say, PS2 controller were more suitable, FPS' would have done way better on PS2, considering it is a far better selling console.

100% incorrect. What FPSs outside of the Halo franchise has sold better on Xbox vs. PS2? People played Halo because is was amazing at the time, not because the cake pan sized controller was superior in any way, shape or form.

Re:Troll? I don't think so. More like businessman (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13894804)

What about this....Halo was bought because it's a fun FPS on a console...not because the controler was "amazing"....The only time I buy FPS for the controler is when I chose PC over console...

Re:Troll? I don't think so. More like businessman (2, Insightful)

vertinox (846076) | more than 8 years ago | (#13892966)

He may have better insight into the industry than any of us.

The same thing could be said about Generals in WWI. Just because this is your profession, may not automatically mean you know what the front line conditions are like unless you participate in it.

When he has actually played a Nintedo revolution FPS game using the controller then he may judge it.

You realize that joysticks were a gimmick (1)

the_skywise (189793) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893144)

Right?

Steering controllers? Gimmick.

Analog thumbsticks? Gimmick.

Sure, it's DIFFERENT. And it might not work and then again it might and if you corner the market with it.. that makes you a GOOD businessman, which is not generally of the "me too" variety.

Horrible Businessman more like it (1)

Prien715 (251944) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893373)

First of all, they are competing products in the same way a BMW and an SUV are. Can you drive them both to work? Sure, but many people own both. However, one appeals to higher quality and the other appeals to utility. BMW makes money. GM loses money. Guess which one sells more vehicles? Want an example in the software world? Apple computers. Apple's software/hardware product offerings (other than iTunes, whose main purpose is a marketing device for the iPod) compete on quality rather than purely volume. Go take a look at their stock chart or even their PC division shipping numbers and compare that to, say HP's margins. Most people who own a Mac or an iPod have a PC as well.

Of course Nintendo won't make more revenue, but revenue has little to do with profit; they'll spend less on the graphical fancies and processor power, recouping the unspent R&D money to fund game development. I bought Paper Mario the other day, it was still $50 years later, and still worth playing (thus differentiating their platform). With little first party game development and nearly identical interfaces (e.g. controllers), Sony and MS will be locked in totally undifferentiated products in a price race to the bottom, benefitting consumers, but hurting their margins and bottom line (MS may win this, since Halo 1/2 is the entire reason many people have an X-box). Both of them, by the way, are losing money. Nintendo makes a profit.

Re:Horrible Businessman more like it (1)

DarkYoshi (895118) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893990)

Nintendo makes a profit.

Of course, they're the only ones who understand that if you want to make a profit, you have to sell something for more than you bought it. If I buy a banana for a dollar, and sell it to your for half a dollar, I lost money. It doesn't matter how many accesories and games I sell you for that banana, I still lost money on the banana itself. What's the point?

Re:Troll? I don't think so. More like businessman (1)

rawmule (744495) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893945)

That's not to say the controller won't eventually be used well, just that launch titles will likely be gimicky.

IIRC, the only announced launch title for the Revolution so far is the new Smash Bros, which will almost certainly be more than a gimmick, given the quality and depth of the Gamecube version. Also hinted at as a launch title is the new Mario. Again, practically guaranteed not to be just a gimmick.

So I think that the gimmick argument won't hold up when we actaully see the games, given that we're at least about a year out away from the launch, and there is already one (if not two) games slated for launch that have every reason to be great. That's not to say there won't be gimmicky games, meaning simple games that use a unique new gameplay mechanic but leave out things like depth and story which you would expect in a more mature title. But at least they'll probably be fun to play (for a short time at least, which is more than can be said for some of the 'gimmicky' (i.e. pretty graphics) games we'll surely be seeing on ps3/xbox360), and some of those gameplay mechanics could be good enough to spawn new genres and become fully developed franchises in their own right. Lost Garden talks more about this development of genres here [lostgarden.com] .

I don't mean to come off a Nintendo fanboy here, I am looking forward to both other next-generation systems (and yes, they are all next-gen Mr. Rein). But, I think that Nintendo is getting a lot of undeserved flack when the only games they've announced for Revolution so far sound like gold.

Re:Troll? I don't think so. More like businessman (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13894401)

I'm a lost customer cuz I refuse to buy FPSers for consoles. The controllers really do suck. If other people like playing slowly than that's their business, but no developer is going to get my money unless the controls can be as accurate as a keyboard and mouse.

Re:Troll? I don't think so. More like businessman (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13898423)

A real businessman would side with the company whose product was pulling a profit. That eliminates Sony and MS.

Nintendo is the only real business in the bunch.

The real reason for the Nintendo bashing... (3, Interesting)

Zangief (461457) | more than 8 years ago | (#13893911)

is the fact that Nintendo hasn't licensed the Unreal Engine for the Revolution.

Moron (1)

richman555 (675100) | more than 8 years ago | (#13894363)

When Nintendo said this industry was in a glut, I didn't really beleive it, until now. The only other thing I can think of is this guy is very insecure. To say gaming is diven completely with graphics is bologna. I think he is bashing Nintendo only because he sees them as a threat. My opinion is that 1) The revolution controller will work as described, 2) The system will not be underpowered (Without all the HDTV at those widescreen resolutions, Im sure it will be much easier to keep up the frame rates at the lower resolutions), 3) It will be more affordable than any of the systems, 4) The games will be among the very best, 5) Nintendo will find great success when its games finally go 'Online'.

What a blowhard... (1)

bitwiseNomad (814756) | more than 8 years ago | (#13894667)

In my personal opinion, this dude is talking out his ass.

The Revolution controller is a massive improvement over the current controller designs when it comes to first person shooters.

First person shooters are 3D games. That means that somehow, the player has to have access to a at least a 4D pointing device. They need to be able to move in two dimensions (at the minimum) to move along the ground, and they need a second 2D locator in order to pick an angle at which to fire. In total, you need two separate 2D pointing devices to play an FPS, for a total of 4D. (really you need a 5D locator to play FPS's because your character moves in three dimensions (i.e. they aren't stuck to the ground.) Your average console or PC cannot emulate a 5D locator. However, this issue is avoided in most FPS's because there is normally some sort of gravity in the level to limit the amount of motion your character can have in the third dimension. In most FPS's, walking occurs in two dimensions, and you can achieve limited motion in the third dimension by using your jump button.)

There are a few ways you can get 4D location. On a PC, you use your left fingers to press WASD for movement (with thumb on spacebar for jump) and your right hand on the mouse to control aim. On consoles, this problem has been solved by having two 2D control sticks used for moving and aiming respectively. The Revolution nunchuck controller is better because it emulates a 5D pointing device.

In addition to having the left-handed control stick to replace WASD, the right-handed pointer will be able to locate a point anywhere on your television screen. What's even cooler is that the pointer will also be able to point at points inside your TV since it can determine its own distance from the TV's screen. This doesn't easily solve the problem of true 3D character movement, but it opens up interesting potential for tasks that would actually require you to reach into your TV screen to do things.

In short, the Revolution controller provides all of the necessary parts needed to control an FPS. It is more intuitive since you really are pointing where you are aiming, and its unique features actually add more degrees of control than you could get on a PC or a current console. For example, in order to emulate the Revolution controller on your PC, you would have to lift your mouse up and have it be able to detect its distance to the mousepad, and it would still have to detect sliding, even when not in contact with the mousepad. There are 3D mice out there for PC's, but they are certainly not as mass-consumption as the Revolution controller will be.

Here is the second reason the Revolution Controller is superior for FPS's. Go find a laser pointer or a flashlight and sit down facing a relatively blank wall in your dwelling. Turn the laser or flashlight on set it comfortably in your lap. Now, point at a spot near the left end of the wall, pretending that you're playing an FPS and that the light is your targetting reticule. With your eyes, pick out a spot on the right side of the wall. Quickly move the light to the spot you picked, and then move it back to where it started. Now, point at the spot on the left side of the wall, but extend your arm. Do the same thing with your arm extended - move to the right side and back to the left.

The first thing you did is the Revolution controller. The second thing you did is a mouse on your PC. When using the Revolution Controller, you can make very large motions with very small movements of the wrist. On a PC with a mouse, you have to move your entire arm when dragging the mouse all the way across the mousepad. Using a PC mouse is comfortable since your wrist is probably resting on a wristrest or on your desk, but the fact that such little motion can have such a big effect on the Revolution Controller means that playing FPS's with it will be much faster and more accurate than on a PC, and magnitudes better than by using a control stick (where your rate of motion is ultimately controlled by the software).

Also, in order to turn around in an FPS on your PC, most likely you have to pick your mouse up and set it back down on your mousepad to get extra turning distance. With the Revolution Controller, all you would have to do is point off-screen and wait for your character to turn. Either way, you have to move less to get the same effect with the Revolution Controller than with either of the two ways that exist already.

I certainly hope this guy isn't in any sort of software job, because he certainly seems to lack basic knowledge about multiple-dimensional spaces and just how much actually goes in to controlling an FPS. The Revolution Controller is a godsend for FPS fans like myself. I'm even a little worried that I won't be able to go back to a mouse after using it.

Re:What a blowhard... (1)

RzUpAnmsCwrds (262647) | more than 8 years ago | (#13894924)

"In my personal opinion, this dude is talking out his ass.

The Revolution controller is a massive improvement over the current controller designs when it comes to first person shooters."

In my opinion, you're talking out of your ass. Have you ever considered that perhaps controller design has reached a point of mautrity? There's a reason that keyboards and mice are fundamentally the same as they were 20 years ago - the input device works, and it works well.

The problems with the Revolution controller are numerous.

First, it eliminates compatibility - games that play well on the PS3 or XBox 360 will likely play poorly on the Revolution. And most (if not all) of the first-person-shooters on the Cube were XBox/PS2 simultaneous releases or ports. The "different" controller makes companies like EA question whether they even want to do a port. Now, you may argue that companies will make exclusive Revolution FPS games, but that wasn't the case with the Cube, and there is no reason to believe that it will be the case with the Revolution.

Second, the analog controller is awkward. You're going to need it for movement control in FPS games, but it's attached to the "main" controller with a damn cable. That basically rules out fast movements of the Revolution controller.

Third, you need to make big movements to make small changes with the Revolution controller. That's bad from an ergonomic standpoint. Can you imagine moving your arm around in the air (or, for that matter, twisting your wrist) for multiple hours on end?

Fourth, it has very few buttons. If you use the d-pad for weapon selection, Start for the menu, a for primary fire, and b for secondary fire, you still need to find another button for jumping, a button for "Use", a button for reload, a button for crouch - where are these buttons going to come from? How are you even going to use the buttons at the bottom of the remote?

Nintendo is a very unique and innovative controller. But designing a controller that is radically different is a bad move for a company that very much needs third-party involvement. In the end, the games make the system. And Nintendo cannot deliver a compelling game lineup without 3rd party developers.

Re:What a blowhard... (1)

Orome (159034) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895040)

"In my opinion, you're talking out of your ass. Have you ever considered that perhaps controller design has reached a point of mautrity? There's a reason that keyboards and mice are fundamentally the same as they were 20 years ago - the input device works, and it works well."

The keyboard and mouse do not fundamentally deter people from using a computer. Modern controllers do simply because they look too complicated to the layman. I think its pretty obvious what is more intuitive - rotating analog sticks to control your _rate_ of looking around in an FPS, or making small precise movements with your wrist to achieve the same thing.

"The problems with the Revolution controller are numerous.
First, it eliminates compatibility - games that play well on the PS3 or XBox 360 will likely play poorly on the Revolution. And most (if not all) of the first-person-shooters on the Cube were XBox/PS2 simultaneous releases or ports. The "different" controller makes companies like EA question whether they even want to do a port. Now, you may argue that companies will make exclusive Revolution FPS games, but that wasn't the case with the Cube, and there is no reason to believe that it will be the case with the Revolution."

Point taken. I'm having a hard time trying to imagine how certain genres (such as sports) can even be played using the revolution controller. However if you look fundamentally, all the analog sticks + dpad on normal controllers do is capture directional information - the revolution controller just does it differently. So there is still a chance that with a little thought, a developer could come up with a good interface for revolution ports.

"Second, the analog controller is awkward. You're going to need it for movement control in FPS games, but it's attached to the "main" controller with a damn cable. That basically rules out fast movements of the Revolution controller.
Third, you need to make big movements to make small changes with the Revolution controller. That's bad from an ergonomic standpoint. Can you imagine moving your arm around in the air (or, for that matter, twisting your wrist) for multiple hours on end?"

This is completely wrong. If you read what the parent said - and this has been confirmed by a number of people who were present at the demonstration Miyamoto gave at TGS - you make _large_ movements onscreen simply by flicking your wrist. So effectively, you use the analog stick attachment and the 'remote' with your hands resting on your lap comfortably. Nintendo themselves are probably to blame for this misconception because they showed a guy jumping out from behind a sofa waving his arms frantically in the video at TGS.

"Fourth, it has very few buttons. If you use the d-pad for weapon selection, Start for the menu, a for primary fire, and b for secondary fire, you still need to find another button for jumping, a button for "Use", a button for reload, a button for crouch - where are these buttons going to come from? How are you even going to use the buttons at the bottom of the remote?"

The analog attachment has two trigger buttons. Having too many buttons will simply go against their philosophy of trying to make things simpler.

"Nintendo is a very unique and innovative controller. But designing a controller that is radically different is a bad move for a company that very much needs third-party involvement. In the end, the games make the system. And Nintendo cannot deliver a compelling game lineup without 3rd party developers."

Only time will tell if third-party developers are ready to and do make quality games. I surely hope they do, Nintendo needs it and the game industry does need a company like Nintendo.

Re:What a blowhard... (1)

bitwiseNomad (814756) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895325)

From what I've read, the Revolution's wand controller can be stuck into a "shell" which is shaped like an ordinary controller, allowing you to control a game using a button layout you're used to. As an added bonus, the controller could transmit data about how the controller shell is oriented in space, allowing an appropriately-programmed game to react to the player tilting the shell around. The Revolution will have no problems playing ported games from the other two systems, since those games can simply instruct the player to put the wand controller into the controller shell. Remember, even if the controller is sending orientation data, the program can simply ignore it and only respond to button presses.

The people who got to play with the controller at the Tokyo Games Festival said that it felt completely natural to use the controller, even with the nunchuck thingie attatched. The thing is you don't have to move your wrist much at all to make big movements, but you can also make tiny movements moving your wrist the same distance, too. Unless you're flailing your arms around, having a cord attatched shouldn't be a big deal.

As far as buttons, you forgot about the two triggers located on the left-handed part of the nunchuk controller. It has an analog stick and two triggers which you can press with your index and middle fingers.

So, controls:

Controller aims, takes care of sniper rifle zooming, fluid posture and leaning. The two triggers on the left-handed nunchuck control are your crouch and reload. Start pauses, select toggles altrenate fire. A jumps, B trigger fires. A "Use" button can be contextually mapped to any of those. Also, "using" something may be done by using the controller's 3D location abilities. In a lot of FPS's, you can "Use" a button to push it, but with the Revolution controller, you can extend your hand out, pushing the button by actually extending your hand in game. There seem to be enough buttons on the controller to create a basic FPS control scheme. It certainly has a lot more potential than any of the other console control schemes I've seen, especially since it has natural support for things like fluid posture and leaning, and rolling, etc.

At the same time, the controller shell can provide all the buttons you need to play an EA sports game or whatever.

Re:What a blowhard... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13895355)

Bah, fuck compatibility. Fuck the same old, same old. I've had it for over 20 years and I'm fucking sick of it. Fuck newer graphics. Fuck the standard controller. Play your games that are nigh-identical. Live in your ivory tower. Be a sick sack of shit. Go for it. You people are pathetic.

Speaking of blowhards... (1)

Fluffy the attack ki (890645) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895022)

Your description of the failings of any control system other than the Revolution controller is filled with such marvelously amusing hyperbole that I could not help but laugh. All these years I've been playing Descent, with it's 6D control scheme, I never thought to question the fact that what I was doing was impossible! To be fair I must admit that I needed to use a shift function or two to fit all of D3's miscellaneous functions onto a gamepad (although not with keyboard or KB/M).

As for mice, I would point out that at least one of the problems you noted is actually an advantage. We do not pick up mice because we have to, we do it because absolute mouse control works better for first person shooters than relative control. You say you want the control system that allows you to spin around in circles forever without lifting your hand. Are you sure that's better than the one that can only do one and a half spins, but will never drift or overturn, and which responds instantly and accurately to your hand movements?

Oh... And that bit about excessive arm movement is, at least for some of us, complete bull. I, for one, never lift the back of my hand from the pad while playing.

I reserve judgement on whether or not the Revolution controller sucks until it hits the market and we can get our hands on it in the real world. It might effectively replicate the mouse for console gamers, but insisting that it will make the standard PC KB/M setup obsolete is stretching a bit far.

Re:Speaking of blowhards... (2, Insightful)

bitwiseNomad (814756) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895290)

Descent is 5D. 3D locator for your ship, and 2D locator for your ship's angle. Having more than one way of changing your ship's angle or position doesn't add any more D's, it just means there are more buttons to push, or the controls are more versatile. (Think of it this way: The space you move in is three dimensional, but choosing your angle is the same as locating a point on a hollow sphere with a fixed radius. Select any point on the sphere and it determines your angle. You would have 6D controls if said sphere was filled, and you could choose any point on the exterior OR interior to aim at.)

Also, I'm sorry if you misunderstood me. I wasn't trying to say that it was impossible to emulate n-dimensional controls using a PC (for relatively small n). Of course it's possible. I can divide the keys on the keyboard into pairs and map each pair to a dimension and wind up with something like a 40D game (I didn't bother counting keys). My point was that the Revolution Controller has all of the mechanisms that one would need to play your average FPS (FPS, not flying-around-ship-shooter, since Mark Rein was talking about FPS's.), and that it actually provides new functions that aren't easily emulated by a PC. On a PC, if you wanted to reach into your screen, you could either get a 3D mouse, map two keyboard buttons to handle the task, or use your mousewheel. 3D mice aren't pervasive (meaning that your average game developer could not assume that their customers possessed the hardware), and mapping the keys splits your aiming mechanisms between two hands (and may also interfere with moving and aiming at the same time). The only plausible solution I can see is to use the mousewheel, but there are still some serious problems with it if you want to do anything more complicated than zoom a sniper rifle.

This isn't so with the Revolution Controller. You can use it to draw a circle in 3D space in any orientation you can move your hand in. The best you could get with your mouse/mousewheel is a sort of ovally-diamond, and that's if you're particularly coordinated and the circle was rectilinearly aligned to an axis. Many FPS's also have fluid posture and buttons mapped to make your character lean in certain ways. Since the Revolution Controller can also determine its orientation in 3D space, these functions can also become much smoother and more intuitive.

Mark Rein was also specifically talking about consoles. Even though it is possible to create a 40D game on a PC, you are going to have a lot of trouble replicating the experience on an XBox. You don't have any sort of 3D locating device on a normal console controller without pressing non-control stick buttons. (The PS2 clicky analog sticks don't count since you can only move in one direction in the third dimension with them. Also, it's difficult to press them in and move the stick at the same time.) The out-of-the-way buttons can substitute as the third-dimension controls, but normally you have your thumbs on the control sticks and your index fingers on both triggers so that you can fire, so pressing those buttons approaches being ergonomically impossible. The PS2 controller may be able to pull it off (using the secondary triggers), but the index fingers would have to choose between movement or shooting.

There's a reason game devs don't often try to impliment these control schemes.

You say you want the control system that allows you to spin around in circles forever without lifting your hand. Are you sure that's better than the one that can only do one and a half spins, but will never drift or overturn, and which responds instantly and accurately to your hand movements?

People who have actually used the controller have said that it feels completely natural and that they could detect no lag or discrepancies in how it responded to their hand movements. Of course there will be problems if the controller doesn't react quickly or accurately enough, but according to testimony I've read, it works flawlessly.

I certainly don't see how the "spin infinitely" control scheme would feel any less natural than using a mouse. Have you ever turned your head to look at something and let your body turn a moment later? Do you notice how your head straightens out with your body as you continue to look at the thing while turning? That's what using the control scheme is like.

As an example, imagine you're playing an FPS, and there is a baddie in the upper right-hand corner of your screen. You point the controller at him, and your targetting reticule moves onto him. (Here your viewpoint may move instantly with the cursor, or it may lag a bit). Say it lags. Your viewpoint starts to shift in the direction you offset the cursor. As your viewpoint moves, you continue to aim at the baddie (probably firing at him), and your wrist turns to slowly move the cursor back to the center of the screen as your view centers on your target.

Altrenately, say your viewpoint has no lag and follows your cursor instantly. For someone who has never used the control scheme before, odds are they would overshoot the first few times they tried to hit the target. After they learned to move the cursor a slightly smaller distance in the same direction, they would be able to hit the target.

Of course I will wait before judging the controller. It may be poorly implimented in hardware, or game devs may fall down on the job and make it seem unnatural. But I do think that (at least in the console realm), we have hit a wall as far as being able to add more gameplay elements to the FPS genre. Having a controller which basically offloads all of the controls associated with character posture, aim and gesture means that it's possible to (naturally) add new gameplay elemenents to FPS's, ones that may even make them feel fresh again.

Thanks for the brilliant comments, Rein (1)

Strell (877448) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895284)

Mark Rein> But the big thing is graphics. It's all about graphics. Graphics give me a boner. I love boners. It's all about boners. Omg I've got a boner right now. Who wants to see it? It's all about my boner. It's all about looking at my boner. Look at my boner. I love it when people look at my boner. Who wants to touch it? Touch my boner. It's all about touching my boner.

Why the game cube controller will sell millions (1)

FuzzyDustBall (751425) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895637)

Because lucas arts will be unable to resist making some crappy light saber dueling game, And every Star Wars geek will have to own it, No matter how bad it is. On another note I will buy an XBOX-360 PS3 and Revalution. But the only one im realy excited about is the nintendo.

How insightful. (1)

LordVader717 (888547) | more than 8 years ago | (#13895796)

Holding up an Xbox 360 pad, to whoops and cheers from the audience, he proclaimed: "This is the Xbox 360 controller, and there's nothing wrong with it.

He then held up a first-gen XBOX and said: "This is an XBOX, and there's nothing wrong with it, it works the same as a 360. To hell with all this next gen crap, I'm sticking with this generation!"

His point is fundamentally flawed. If he believes the gaming experience can be improved by better graphics, then the same is true with an improved interface.

I'll be damned if two hundred years from now, noone has found a more natural way to play games than pressing buttons and rotating sticks on a small block of plastic.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>